..... . 2 herein instituted a complaint case in the court of the learned chief judicial magistrate, nagaon, the case of the complainant being, in brief, thus: m/s sangita is a partnership firm dealing in electronic goods, namely, akai, onida and panasonic products, the complainant being a partner of the said firm. the accused, as proprietor of a shop, which was run ..... cheque. as no payment was made by the accused, the complainant instituted the complaint.(ii) to the charges framed against him under section 420 ipc and section 138 of the negotiable instruments act (in short, the 'n.i. act'), the accused pleaded not guilty. in support of his case, the complainant examined six witnesses. the accused was, then, examined under section 313 cr ..... have been committed by the accused. no evidence was, however, adduced by the defence.4. having found the accused guilty of the offences under section 420 ipc and section 138 of the n.i. act, the learned trial court convicted the accused accordingly and passed sentence against him as indicated above. as the appeal preferred by the accused has failed to yield ..... above, this revision succeeds. the impugned judgments and orders are hereby set aside. the accused-petitioner is held not guilty of the offences under section 138 of the n.i. act and under section 420 ipc and he is acquitted of the same.35. with the above observations and directions, this revision shall stand disposed of. no order as to costs. .....

..... be regarded as a permissible outgoing in the account of the business which was transferred. what happened therein was that after dissolution of the partnership firm on the death of one of the two partners, the business was taken over and continued by the other surviving partner on his ..... cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea as is defined to be agricultural income for the purposes of the enactments relating to the indian income-tax.9. under the assam act, section 8(1) provides that the agricultural income mentioned in sub-clause (2) of clause (a) of section 2 shall ..... appears that the restriction that has been imposed by such amended proviso is that in order to be an admissible deduction under the assam act, the expenditure should not only be allowable but it should also be actually admissible and such interpretation would definitely be in consonance with the ..... in the accounting year shall be computed for deduction. however, there is no such identical provision in the assam agricultural income-tax act. section 37 of the act provides for such allowance.it is the case of the petitioner-company that they are maintaining their accounts in the mercantile system. in ..... provision, which authorises the agricultural tax authority of the state to disallow an expenditure which has been incurred from agricultural income under the assam act unless the expenditure is actually incurred/paid during the previous year corresponding to the relevant assessment year.30. it is further contended that the .....

..... , whereafter siranjilal bajaj attorned to them as their landlord. on the death of siranjilal bajaj the petitioner no. 1/defendant no. 1 constituted a partnership along with his brother joy krishan bajaj and sister in law mrs. usha bajaj and carried on the business of grocery in the suit house. the ..... not preceded by any offer thereof to the landlord and refusal by latter are not inconformity with the imperatives of section 5(4) of the act and therefore are invalid and ineffectual. the same cannot thus be equated with an amount lying in deposit with the landlord following the concurrence ..... ought to have been examined by the high court. though under section 7(2)(a) of the andhra pradesh buildings (lease, rent and eviction) control act, 1960, the landlady was forbidden to receive any premium or other like sums in excess of the agreed rent, eviction on the ground of willful ..... 86 has been preceded by offer to and refusal thereof by the respondents plaintiffs, one of the pre essentials of section 5(4) of the act being unfulfilled, the learned court below rightly held the petitioners defendants to be defaulter in payment of rent. the learned senior counsel asserted that as ..... bonafide need for the premise which allegedly existed at the initiation of the suit did not subsist thereafter and therefore, the learned court below had acted illegally in exercise of its jurisdiction in deciding the related issue in favour of the respondents plaintiffs. the written arguments submitted on behalf of the .....